As said it before, there are seller on ebay and amibay who sells SwinSID, built, programmed .... i doubt they have any more permissions to do so.
ReSID-fp is only the foundation and not the source!! The code Hermit wrote is 100% avr assmebly, with tricks and shortcuts to be able to handle the task in this puny uC (mostly the comments in resid-fp has been used)

My device has a lot more components, needed a lot more time to even laid out the PCB, so for assembly alone would grant it's price!

But as I said, how would you blame the clone sellers that they "steal" something which is freely available, if your approach isn't better?

Maybe because after long years of no progress, Hermit and I have increased the compatibility and quality to an unimaginable level? We did WORK on this (not just cosmetic)?
They can sell whatever they want but I would like to get something back for my work too.

And for hobby builders -- can you really put two QFN16, an SOP8, a TQFP44, a TQFP32 a dozen of resistors and half a dozen capacitor to a PCB the size of a DIP28; program a Xilinx CPLD and two AVR uC ?
Not to mention, if you could design and make your own PCB...

And for last -- even IF the Atmega code is not clean, the CPLD and the Attiny(paddle) are, and w/o those, the Atmega can't work properly...

Also look at how many products has gone from open source to closed -- not only to hide from hobbyist but to protect themselves from cheap knock-offs or because the complexity is now beyond the average hobby builders.

The code is not completely blocked off from people, because Hermit made the jsSID based on the code he written for the SwinSID Ultimate: csdb.dk/release/?id=145523

I have just downloaded a set of Gerber images from tolaemon.com/nss/ but there seems to be some files missing, namely the 'Board Outline' and 'Drill File' Does anyone have a complete set as I would really like to have a go at doing a set of these for a couple of old C64's that have dead SID's.

And for hobby builders -- can you really put two QFN16, an SOP8, a TQFP44, a TQFP32 a dozen of resistors and half a dozen capacitor to a PCB the size of a DIP28; program a Xilinx CPLD and two AVR uC ?

Not to mention, if you could design and make your own PCB...

2) Why yes, yes I can thanks - and I'm far from an SMD or electronics expert. I'm a perfectionist who has learnt that I can create anything, given enough time and dedication.

Soldering SMD circuits is becoming cheaper and easier all the time - hot-air re-work stations are available from just over $100 now. For circuit board layout there is the free and open-source KiCad. To etch DIY circuits I use the crude but effective Hydrogen Peroxide + Muriatic Acid (H²O2+Hcl) method. Decent microprocessor/Eeprom programmers can be bought ready-made for under $100.

Just because something is not easy does not make it impossible for hobbyists. That is a lame excuse!

Also look at how many products has gone from open source to closed -- not only to hide from hobbyist but to protect themselves from cheap knock-offs or because the complexity is now beyond the average hobby builders.

3) Corporations have gotten into the same argument, but always lose in court. Many businesses have tried to take non-profit open-source software such as Linux, alter it for themselves and then make a profit on it. The problem is they have to abide by the original license of the works they are basing their improvements on - only separate applications, utilities or drivers can be sold for profit in such cases... not their "improvements" or extensions on the core system.

You appear to have made something useful, but even if you only used the original SwinSID for reverse-engineering reference, then you are still basing your device on the works of others.

You appear to have made something useful, but even if you only used the original SwinSID for reverse-engineering reference, then you are still basing your device on the works of others.

The original project was never GPL-ed (or any other licensed), the later FWs didn't even had source code available so there is no excuse. I respect Swinkels for the original work, but my (or in the sound-gen code Hermit's) work is well beyond that.

Now the SwinSID Ultimate does not share any code from the original, so how could you call it derivative work?!
Your argument is totally false: WE ALL base our works on the the work of others!! If not, then we could not write, or speak, everybody should reinvent the wheel all the time!
And for example have you heard about the JiffyDos??

What do you call it? A new commodore64? Clearly not as those are only ROMs. Still sold if you want them legally!

In summary: You require info about a project you never contributed, helped, or even promoted, just because there was a roughly similar project in the past that has the designs available?? And all of it for free of course?! Are you serious??

You can still use the orig--- i mean my improved fw (lazy fix) -- but if you need better, then you can do it better and show, how to be open-source!

Anyway, in this thread a few posts later, Swinkels also posted SwinSID88_20141027.hex which also seems to include this fix. He said it is a "test version" but nobody ever responded to a call for testing.

I upgraded one of mine to this and it sounds fine also. Should I be running the lazy_fix or the slightly (days?) newer firmware on my original Swinsid Nano? Is there a problem with Swinkel's test version?

Anyway, in this thread a few posts later, Swinkels also posted SwinSID88_20141027.hex which also seems to include this fix. He said it is a "test version" but nobody ever responded to a call for testing.

I upgraded one of mine to this and it sounds fine also. Should I be running the lazy_fix or the slightly (days?) newer firmware on my original Swinsid Nano? Is there a problem with Swinkel's test version?

I think I did test this version and the result was less than satisfactory. If memory serves, there was a lot of noise even when nothing was playing. Flashing the Lazy Jones fix firmware solved the problem. I can, however, also find Swinkels's 20120524 firmware in the same directory of my hard drive, so I might actually have accidentally flashed that one, believing it was the test firmware you mentioned (also present in the same folder of my hard drive). When I get the chance, I'll see if I can test the 20141027 test firmware a bit more and will report back here.

With respect to the unanswered question above regarding firmware, there are quite a lot of us with original spec nano-swinsids probably
wondering if Your firmware is compatible? Paddle and mouse support is nice, but not everyone will want to buy another nano swinsid if a
firmware update can get us much closer to experiencing the SID as it should be.

We know You don't want to just put the FW out there due to the possibility of clones popping up everywhere, fully understandable giving
the time and resources already spent, but how about selling it via Paypal for a fee?, especially if we are looking at years before You make
it available. It's just an idea anyway.

That's fine if you don't want a full or even extended version, i planned to be somewhat modular:
- just the bare minimal to make sound
- compatibility with the old games (env3/osc3 available too)
- full compatibility (added mouse/paddle support)
- extended (and some flashy leds )

Please understand, that i can't control the firmware any more, if i make it downloadable even for a fee --- somebody buys it then s/he can upload it to as many blank/old device as s/he pleases....

The HC version of the swinsid is not compatible with the old version of the hardware (needs a bit of modification) however the latest developments are meant for a more different hardware.

But currently we haven't even completed the hw nor the sw ... there are some in progress versions out, but sadly those still has some bugs in them.

CodeKiller: Are you still willing to make/release any additional small improvements to the old SwinSID nano firmware for hobbyists that would work with its hardware, or will you only be focusing on the Ultimate?

I don't want to go into any debate about right/wrong, whether you should release sources or not, etc. Just a humble question for people who still want to build and use the nanos.